Back to Greg's Opinion ... City Hall Version: Take One
Well, I called "close" and I got "close." By 579 votes out of 35,885, SEIU Lovell has been bought. Sour grapes? Not quite. To be sure, Jay's loss is one that stings. He's a friend, his worldview is one that I share a bit of kinship with, and he campaigned admirably even in the face of blatantly illegal campaign practices, racist slurs, and other assorted lies. Back in January, I didn't have a bad word to say towards Ms. Lovell. But over the course of the campaign, I haven't a shred of respect for the woman.
When she shows the wherewithal to admit publically what she apparently stated in front of the Ethics Commission the day before the election, maybe that'll change a bit. How a so-called Ethics Commission can hear her tell them that she got the check from the SEIU, and was then told to lose their cell phone number because they'd be "making an independent expenditure" (actual quote from an eyewitness) ... and everyone could tell you, based on the SEIU's history in San Antonio and other races exactly WHAT those expenditures would be ... this election is a travesty.
SEIU Lovell is a crook. Simple as that. Just like Tom DeLay. Just like Joe Nixon. I've got friends who supported Sue SEIU Lovell out of friendship and I completely get that. But in supporting her, they've now silenced whatever outrage they have at the Republican Culture of Corruption. Instead of combatting corruption, SEIU Lovell has joined the ranks of the corrupt and I refuse to turn a blind eye towards that.
With a little luck, City Council will have on it's agenda a fix for at least part of what happened this time around.
Oh, and whoever wants a free campaign manager to run against her in 2007 ... call me.
I concur. I think the negative implications for the Democratic Party are even greater than you fear; only Sue Lovell can prove us wrong, by magically becoming the diplomat we never met before.
We as Democrats have a golden opportunity to step in where the Republicans have goofed up, but in selecting Lovell we are not only ceding the high ground, we are setting the stage for a City Council term much muddier than the last one. This is too bad, because a lot of party workers rallied behind Lovell. Someone proved they could turn out some votes, but they turned them out for someone all too likely to let them down -- in a very public way.
It may well be up to Mayor White to deal with her, because he will have the most to lose. As one person said admiringly about Lovell, "she never backs down from a fight". That's great when a fight is worthy, but Lovell acts like someone for whom the fight is the entire reason for existing. If she is really smart she will quiet down and because a staunch, savvy ally of the mayor. If she does not change her behavior, she may well be the biggest thorn in his side, and even a major embarrassment.
I so hope I am wrong about what to expect, but all we have to go on is past experience.
This is very much sour grapes. There is a big difference between a union pouring money into a campaign against a proponent of outsourcing and privatization and the GOP unethical breaches. I think your name calling is over the top.
EL,
Please. Sour grapes, at least to me, is perpetuating a flat-out, unsubstantiated lie even after the candidate you supported won. I've asked for substantiation of the charge previously and you've offered zilch. That speaks volumes.
And if you're now going to go so far as to say there's no difference, then explain how an organization drops $250,000 of mail on ONE candidate even though they are not legally established within Texas as a PAC to do so. They file nothing with the city, nothing with the state despite rather strict laws that require it. Ironically, the amount of money Tom DeLay is in trouble for over TRMPAC is actually LESS than the amount of money that the SEIU has illegally spent in this race. And if or when SEIU Lovell will admit publically what she stated to the Ethics Board, there's no way you could possibly suggest otherwise. She's admitted to working in concert with SEIU. That's illegal. Period.
Well, now, I can certainly vouch for Seiu Lovell's antics, as I was a member of Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus in the 1980's. She , along with the Grand Queer Of Montrose, Ray Hill, (yes, oh, yes, I am daring to criticize the Oracle of Fagdom) ran the organization to their specific liking. Sue and Ray's attitude was that they knew everything, and nobody else did--unless of course Ray and Seiu could control you. Then it was a different story. Seiu is an arrogant, self-serving politician, only in it for the personal glory.
One notices immediately on meeting her, how stiff and formulaic her speech is--it is as if she is talking at you , not to you. I found her to be a very hollow, vulgar, and common woman--with a large Bowie knife up her sleeve for a number of occasions. I am sorry to agree with the individual who wrote in lament here that Sue is the "best" the Democratic Party can come up with. What a narrow, small person Lovell is. It is just a shame.